«
»

20-20 Hindsight

As I left the Fox Studio in DC after taping last Friday’s O’Reilly Factor (see here), I felt pretty good about the appearance, but as always, I thought of a couple of additional things I should have said. Then I thought, “Hey, I can continue my answer on the Humanist blog.” During a four minute segment, it’s important to streamline answers and get the message across quickly. Four minutes is also not sufficient to send lots of different messages or to go in-depth on anything complex. Better venues for more in-depth information include half hour radio appearances and podcasts.

So here’s the main piece that really could have used one more line: When Bill O’Reilly asked me if it would have been alright had Mitt Romney, instead of claiming that Americans believe our liberty is a gift from God, had said “most Americans” believe that. I answered that it would have made the statement more accurate. What I should have added was, “…but it would have been just as irrelevant. He didn’t single out any other majority. A candidate doesn’t need to say, ‘most Americans are white.’ A candidate for president ought to agree to represent all Americans, including minorities.” OK, there may not have been enough time to get all of that in, and quite frankly I’m surprised that O’Reilly let me get in as many comments as I did.

Of my four appearances on his show, this was my favorite. And Fox’s hair and makeup people even perked me up after a very bad hair day. And at the end of the day, isn’t that the most important thing?

Share|
This entry was posted by Lori on December 12, 2007 at 12:11 pm and is filed under Media, Separation of Religion and Government, US Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
  • Peter

    I’d really prefer that all decent people stop appearing on that channel, if not all television, altogether. I would like to believe at appearing on Fox News somehow helps whatever cause someone is trying to promote, but I really don’t see how that could be the case. Sure, you might get some sort of short-term bump, but the long-term effects of supporting the racist, anti-human channel – just a bit more racist and anti-human that most corporate networks – is going to far outweigh any short-term gains.

    p.s. what’s the difference between the two checkboxes?

  • http://thechapel.wordpress.com the chaplain

    I disagree with Peter. If , normal, sensible, non-extremist people don’t appear on Fox, then that network’s viewers will have even less exposure to normal, sensible, non-extremist points of view. Their tunnel-vision will only be reinforced if they only get one side of the story all the time. Yes, O’Reilly and his ilk slant their shows heavily, but if humanists, real scientists, etc., can get their views across in an appealing way, they may be able to sow some seeds in the viewers’ minds. If no one goes on their shows, the seeds will never be sown at all.

  • http://www.fullerwiser.com/ Fuller Wiser

    O’Reilly, Hannity and their ilk are disgusting, and I am no longer able to think rationally when I see their faces. When I think of their role in dumbing down the nation and its schools that my son will soon start attending, it makes me think seriously of removing them from this planet by whatever means necessary.

    I applaud you for being able to sit in the same room with that abomination and not stab him in the eye.

  • http://theperplexedobserver.blogspot.com/ TPO

    I think you did very well, especially considering that you were trying to have a decent conservation with a block head like O’Reilly.

  • Neal Norton

    I think it takes great courage for any rational person to make an apearance on the O’reilly program. Maybe even the vast audience of people who believe in the “Toaster in Orbit” will for a moment or two realize that there are real, non-demonic humans that don’t buy into the B.S. Fox sells on shows like O’reilly.

    Hey, I learned about the FFRF on O’reilly when he tried his best to verbally abuse a representative of that organization. Now I’m a member.

    Regards,

    Neal

  • Francis

    Congratulations, Lori, for doing a good job under difficult conditions. I think you did well what you are supposed to do, and I’m glad you did it. You were not totally bulldozed but did succeed in getting a few good sentences out in spite of the host’s trying to silence your voice. You conducted yourself with dignity under pressure and gave a good representation of rationality to a lot of people. Well done.

  • http://theend-12-21-12.com/ Robert PItt

    Good job in the interview